linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: keescook@chromium.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
	pankaj.laxminarayan.bharadiya@intel.com, joe@perches.com,
	adobriyan@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: renaming FIELD_SIZEOF to sizeof_member
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2019 13:21:21 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191002.132121.402975401040540710.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201910021115.9888E9B@keescook>

From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 11:19:16 -0700

> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 01:56:55PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 01:06:01PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> >  (a) why didn't this use the already existing and well-named macro
>> > that nobody really had issues with?
>> 
>> That was suggested, but other folks wanted the more accurate "member"
>> instead of "field" since a treewide change was happening anyway:
>> https://www.openwall.com/lists/kernel-hardening/2019/07/02/2
>> 
>> At the end of the day, I really don't care -- I just want to have _one_
>> macro. :)
>> 
>> >  (b) I see no sign of the networking people having been asked about
>> > their preferences.
>> 
>> Yeah, that's entirely true. Totally my mistake; it seemed like a trivial
>> enough change that I didn't want to bother too many people. But let's
>> fix that now... Dave, do you have any concerns about this change of
>> FIELD_SIZEOF() to sizeof_member() (or if it prevails, sizeof_field())?
> 
> David, can you weight in on this? Are you okay with a mass renaming of
> FIELD_SIZEOF() to sizeof_member(), as the largest user of the old macro
> is in networking?

I have no objection to moving to sizeof_member().

  reply	other threads:[~2019-10-02 20:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-09-26 17:33 [GIT PULL] treewide conversion to sizeof_member() for v5.4-rc1 Kees Cook
2019-09-26 20:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-09-26 20:56   ` Kees Cook
2019-10-02 18:19     ` renaming FIELD_SIZEOF to sizeof_member (was Re: [GIT PULL] treewide conversion to sizeof_member() for v5.4-rc1) Kees Cook
2019-10-02 20:21       ` David Miller [this message]
2019-10-02 20:53         ` renaming FIELD_SIZEOF to sizeof_member Kees Cook
2019-09-27  6:57   ` [GIT PULL] treewide conversion to sizeof_member() for v5.4-rc1 Alexey Dobriyan

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20191002.132121.402975401040540710.davem@davemloft.net \
    --to=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
    --cc=joe@perches.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pankaj.laxminarayan.bharadiya@intel.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).